I'm also very curious because I might have a use for it soon. > I'm curious about the Bazel namespace problem. Can you elaborate a bit ... > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 4:57 PM Faré <fah...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> rpg:>> Given that Quicklisp and SBCL already refuse to update their >> bundled ASDF versions, because of warnings about deprecated behavior, >> I'm reluctant to donate any of my unpaid time to fixing this: it's a >> strong disincentive to making any improvements to ASDF, as opposed to >> just fixing bugs around the edges. >> On the other hand, the whole point of ASDF 2 and later was that by >> making ASDF upgradable (and with ASDF 3, it's now automatically >> self-upgradable), users shouldn't have to care as much which version >> of ASDF their implementation and package distribution system do or >> don't provide: "just" install the latest ASDF in e.g. >> ~/common-lisp/asdf/ and things will "just work". If the new ASDF is so >> much better, eventually the implementors and distributors should >> follow. >> >> si:> Is it time for ASDF 4 ? There's tons of stuff I'd like to delete or >> change. >> It's always time for ASDF 4, and never time for ASDF 4. The main >> question is: is someone crazy enough to sink in the time to do it, the >> emotional energy to fight half the community, etc. >> >> If only Bazel didn't fuck up their namespace system, the solution >> could have been "just use Bazelisp". >> >> If and when someone volunteers to do ASDF 4 (if ever), there are >> plenty of suggestions in the asdf/TODO file, in addition to the issues >> on gitlab and the old launchpad. Good luck! >> >> —♯ƒ • François-René Rideau • Chief Scientist, MuKn.com >> “With freedom, no more One True Scale to rank people. Everyone pick his own. >> Why vie for a society of equals, when everyone can be superior?”
-- Stelian Ionescu
